WINNIPEG-- It was one of the most gruesome killings in Winnipeg history. Now the man convicted of dismembering his victim inside a city hotel room is back in court.
Sydney Teerhuis appeared before the Manitoba Court of Appeal Friday morning, arguing his second-degree murder conviction should be overturned. His lawyer, Greg Brodsky, is citing 13 different grounds to argue for a conviction on the lesser charge of manslaughter.
They include the judge’s instructions to the jury, the lack of apparent motive and Teerhuis’ apparent intoxication at the time of the 2003 slaying. In the alternative, Teerhuis is arguing his sentence was "harsh and excessive" and should be reduced.
Queen’s Bench Justice Glenn Joyal took the highly unusual step of giving Teerhuis the maximum sentence allowed by law – life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. The mandatory minimum sentence for second-degree murder is life behind bars with no parole eligibility for 10 years, although judges have the discretion to raise it.
Joyal said the horrific details of the random murder warranted such a major increase.
"There is nothing banal about what Mr. Teerhuis did. To have intended these particularly grisly acts is a matter of some signifigance," Joyal said at the time.
The Crown argues no mistakes were made and both the conviction and sentence should stand. The hearing is expected to last the entire day.
Jurors took only a few hours to find Teerhuis guilty as charged following several weeks of graphic evidence. Teerhuis stabbed, beheaded, castrated, dismembered and disemboweled Robin Greene inside suite 309 of the Royal Albert Arms Hotel in July 2003. The two men had met randomly in a Main Street bar earlier that day.
Brodsky had argued his client was was too intoxicated to form the required intent to kill. He said Teerhuis was suffering from "disorganized thinking and impaired judgment" at the time and deserves the benefit of the doubt from jurors.
"He lost it," Brodsky said in closing arguments. He also spoke of Teerhuis' "very unhappy background" which includes being sexually abused as a child.
The Crown argued during closing arguments that Teerhuis is the personification of "evil" who was trying to play a sadistic joke on the justice system. Prosecutor Sheila Leinburd said it’s impossible for a person to be so intoxicated that they wouldn’t remember stabbing a man 68 times and cutting up his body with "surgical-like precision" over the course of several hours, eventually disposing of his organs.
They also cited the fact Teerhuis wrote a series of chilling letters to a Winnipeg man in which he boasted about the slaying and provided graphic details and drawings of what he did. Teerhuis testified that what he wrote in his numerous letters to Dan Zupansky was pure fiction meant to sensationalize his story in the hope of better book sales.
Jurors were divided on the matter of increasing the parole recommendation in Teerhuis' case. Seven jurors recommended raising the wait to 25 years -- as long as a first-degree murder conviction -- while five wished to make no recommendation.Conviction wrongful: grim killer
Man in prison for infamous crime also seeks reduced sentence
A killer who once referred to his dismembered victim as a "human trophy" claims he's been wrongfully convicted of one of Winnipeg's most infamous crimes.
Sydney Teerhuis appeared before the Manitoba Court of Appeal Friday, arguing his second-degree murder conviction should be overturned. His lawyer, Greg Brodsky, cited more than a dozen legal grounds to argue for a conviction on the lesser charge of manslaughter.
They include the judge's instructions to the jury, the lack of a motive and Teerhuis' apparent intoxication at the time of the July 2003 slaying inside a Winnipeg hotel. Teerhuis claims he blacked out and has no memory of the attack, in which Robin Green was stabbed, beheaded, castrated, disemboweled and cut into eight pieces inside suite 309 of the Royal Albert Arms Hotel just hours after they randomly met inside a bar.
Brodsky also criticized the judge for allowing jurors to be shown photos of the crime scene, saying they only "inflamed the passions" of the panel.
If he loses his conviction appeal, Teerhuis is arguing his sentence was "harsh and excessive" and should be reduced. Queen's Bench Justice Glenn Joyal took the highly unusual step of giving Teerhuis the maximum penalty allowed by law -- life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. The mandatory minimum sentence for second-degree murder is life behind bars with no parole eligibility for 10 years, but judges have the discretion to raise it. Joyal said the horrific details of the random murder warranted such a major increase.
The Crown argued Friday no mistakes were made and both the conviction and sentence should stand. The Court of Appeal has reserved its verdict and will give written reasons at a later date. A conviction for manslaughter carries no mandatory life sentence and would give Teerhuis a much quicker shot at returning to society.
Teerhuis appeared frail Friday, having apparently gone through a bout of flesh-eating disease, court heard. He arrived in a wheelchair with a brace around his left leg and had to be assisted by sheriff's officers. Teerhuis has been serving his sentence in Saskatchewan but was brought to Manitoba for the hearing.
Brodsky argued at trial Teerhuis was suffering from "disorganized thinking and impaired judgment" at the time and couldn't have formed the intent needed to prove murder. The Crown called Teerhuis the personification of "evil" who was trying to play a sadistic joke on the justice system. Prosecutor Sheila Leinburd said it's impossible for a person to be so intoxicated they wouldn't remember stabbing a man 68 times and cutting up his body with "surgical-like precision" over several hours, eventually disposing of his organs.
Leinburd also cited the fact Teerhuis wrote a series of chilling letters to a Winnipeg man boasting about the slaying, with graphic details and drawings. Teerhuis testified what he wrote was fiction meant to sensationalize his story to help get a book deal.
Intent not proven: killer
The man convicted in one of the grisliest killings in Winnipeg’s history argued before the province’s highest court Friday that his murder conviction should be overturned and reduced to manslaughter.
Sydney Teerhuis-Moar was convicted in December 2008 of second-degree murder in relation to the July 2003 death of 38-year-old Robin Robert Greene, who was stabbed 68 times, beheaded, gutted and subjected to other atrocities inside a downtown hotel room.
Teerhuis-Moar admitted to the killing, but claimed he was so drunk he couldn’t remember what happened. A jury convicted him of murder and he was sentenced to life in prison with no parole eligibility for 25 years.
In January 2009 Teerhuis-Moar appealed his conviction, citing 13 reasons that he ought not have been found guilty of murder, a charge that requires proof of intent.
On Friday, the Manitoba Court of Appeal heard his arguments. Teerhuis-Moar, who suffered a bout of flesh-eating disease last year, had to have sheriff’s officers drag him into the courtroom on a wooden chair because his wheelchair was too wide for the doorway and he couldn’t walk.
In a hand-written letter to the Winnipeg Sun that Teerhuis-Moar penned from Saskatchewan Penitentiary last month, he said he’s suffered numerous health problems “from hep C to arthritis, diabetes and a rare blood disorder.”
He sat crouched in his wheelchair showing little emotion at Friday’s hearing, where he was dressed in his federal-issue blue T-shirt with a brace around his entire left leg.
Greg Brodsky, Teerhuis-Moar’s lawyer, argued his client’s conviction should be overturned because, among other things, there was no reason to show jurors gruesome photos of the murder scene, which Brodsky said served only “to inflame the passions of the jurors.”
Brodsky also questioned the judge’s instructions to the jury before their deliberations and claimed that the jury selection process was flawed.
In Teerhuis-Moar’s letter to the Sun last month, he claimed he personally knew one of the jurors.
“We had been acquainted back in the late 1980s at Winnipeg’s St. Regis Hotel,” the letter states. “I was not exactly kind to her back then.”
The Appeal Court reserved its decision, which will be delivered in written form at a date yet to be determined.
Intent not proven: killer
The man convicted in one of the grisliest killings in Winnipeg’s history argued before the province’s highest court Friday that his murder conviction should be overturned and reduced to manslaughter.
Sydney Teerhuis-Moar was convicted in December 2008 of second-degree murder in relation to the July 2003 death of 38-year-old Robin Robert Greene, who was stabbed 68 times, beheaded, gutted and subjected to other atrocities inside a downtown hotel room.
Teerhuis-Moar admitted to the killing, but claimed he was so drunk he couldn’t remember what happened. A jury convicted him of murder and he was sentenced to life in prison with no parole eligibility for 25 years.
In January 2009 Teerhuis-Moar appealed his conviction, citing 13 reasons that he ought not have been found guilty of murder, a charge that requires proof of intent.
On Friday, the Manitoba Court of Appeal heard his arguments. Teerhuis-Moar, who suffered a bout of flesh-eating disease last year, had to have sheriff’s officers drag him into the courtroom on a wooden chair because his wheelchair was too wide for the doorway and he couldn’t walk.
In a hand-written letter to the Winnipeg Sun that Teerhuis-Moar penned from Saskatchewan Penitentiary last month, he said he’s suffered numerous health problems “from hep C to arthritis, diabetes and a rare blood disorder.”
He sat crouched in his wheelchair showing little emotion at Friday’s hearing, where he was dressed in his federal-issue blue T-shirt with a brace around his entire left leg.
Greg Brodsky, Teerhuis-Moar’s lawyer, argued his client’s conviction should be overturned because, among other things, there was no reason to show jurors gruesome photos of the murder scene, which Brodsky said served only “to inflame the passions of the jurors.”
Brodsky also questioned the judge’s instructions to the jury before their deliberations and claimed that the jury selection process was flawed.
In Teerhuis-Moar’s letter to the Sun last month, he claimed he personally knew one of the jurors.
“We had been acquainted back in the late 1980s at Winnipeg’s St. Regis Hotel,” the letter states. “I was not exactly kind to her back then.”
The Appeal Court reserved its decision, which will be delivered in written form at a date yet to be determined.
I think the conviction should be reduced on the fact that this man was intoxicated and had disorganized thinking and impaired judgment. He embellished his letters to that director, but really had no idea what he had done. I believe he blacked out and truly doesn't remember what he did as he awoke to a horrific scene inside his hotel room. I believe that he did not have the required state of mind; the intent to kill the victim. His charge should be reduced to manslaughter.
No comments:
Post a Comment